Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards them?

[ProtoAvatar]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

Because the Federation is a formidable competitor, frustrating their desire to expand their power and territory:

Maybe not, in TOS the Klingons and the Romulans were close in enemies of the Federation, their borders touched. Near a century later, the Federation had expanded outward to the point where their borders had reach the far distant star system that held Bajor. But, inspite of this growth, the Klingons and the Romulans were still close to "the action," they had keep pace with the Federation's growth outwards into the galaxy. It wasn't even a case of them growing in three separate directions, regardless of what direction that the Federation grew, the two empires were already there or arrived soon after.

Doesn't sound like the Federation was "frustrating their desire to expand their power and territory." So their's (and others) problem with the Federation lays in other areas and matters. More likely they see Federation is a political, cultural or economic threat.

These aggreessive powers were frustrated that they cannot 'expand their influence' aka conquer anymore worlds which entered the Federation.
Thus, the klingons/romulans/cardassians/etc were forced to expand outwards - and they didn't like that at all.

Perhaps the Klingon empire worried about the Federation's members interfering with their export market share and their access to foreign currency. It was said that there are poor worlds within the Klingon system and they must move outward if they are to survive. Might that be a reference to the Klingon's economic system.

Define 'poor':

Is it 'poor in resources', minerals and the like? Ridiculous. A simple asteroid belt contains vast amounts of such riches. And the klingons control thousands of star systems.
The 'poor in resources' thing just doesn't work when applied to interstellar civilizations: space is full of such resources.

Or is it poor as in 'the society is poor'?
That's more realistic, considering that the national sport of the klingons is killing each other - either in duels or in inter-house wars.

In either case, their 'poor' excuse doesn't even come close to justifying their policy of conquest, murder and theft.
In TOS (the series where the klingons were presented at their most honorable), in your above mentioned 'errand of mercy', we see how exterminating a large part of the coqnuered people is standard practice for the klingons.

In the TOS episode Errand of Mercy, the Klingon Kor stated that this was the motivation for the Federation and the Klingons to go to war :

Kor: "You've tried to hem us in, cut off vital supplies, strangle our trade! "

Now does that sound like the Klingons have a territorial or political problem with the Federation?[/SIZE]

Yes, it DOES sound as if the klingons have a territorial or political problem with the Federation.

The klingons cannot bully/conquer and exploit anymore worlds within the Federation's sphere of influence.
All they have left is legitimate trade with worlds within the Federation and they don't like it at all - they're used to killing and stealing their way into acquiring resources (a method a lot more profitable for them).

 

[Pauln6]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

I think the mistake the writers made was expanding the Federation too far or farther than it could realistically hold. Populated planetary systems would be very far apart. It makes more sense in TOS where they need dilithium sources though.

Having said that, an interstellar war would be quite impractical for everyone. There is so much empty space in 3 dimensions that no race would have much chance of holding the line. Systems could be devastated regularly (not wholly destroyed without red matter but something akin to the xindi attack). Large amounts of resources would have to be spent defending key locations (like Bajor) but that would leave most other systems exceptionally vulnerable. This is one of the reasons why the failure to show Nero taking down Vulcan's automated defences (or at least mentioning them like they did Earth's defences) was a poor oversight.

I think the skirmishing, piracy, spying, and poaching planetary resources that we see in TOS would be the most common problems.

 

[neozeks]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

But considering the fact that went from 4 or 5 worlds in 2161 to rivaling the Klingon Empire in only a century, it's probably not an unreasonable interpretation of Federation behavior. Eddington was probably right when he noted that one of the reasons the Federation gave the Cardassians industrial replicators in the wake of the Klingon invasion was their desire to eventually see the Cardassian Union become a Federation Member State. Ronald D. Moore commented on that scene and noted that one of the reasons that Sisko was so pissed off after Eddington's transmission was that when it came to his description of the Federation's expansion goals, he was right.

First - cannon evidence show us starfleet refusing admittance into the federation for various species rather than trying to get as many worlds 'in' as possible.

Second - if the federation tries to influence other worlds to adopt its values by helping them and being nice to them, I say 'Good for the federation'.
You may have noticed how federation help NEVER comes with strings attached aka 'we'll help you only if you adopt our values', etc.

You find such cultural influence morally lacking? I disagree - indeed, it is a betrayal of your morals to see people suffering due to their social order and NOT help alleviate the problem.

Frankly, I agree with ProtoAvatar. Eddington's speech was some damn good writing but I think the cultural imperialism thing has been way exaggerated. I'm not even sure it should be called cultural imperialism. I mean, it's not like the Federation has a hold on the galactic media or economy or whatever and is bombarding other species with it's products and culture. It's simply interacting with them (or even helping them) and in the process they get exposed to it's culture and values. If they think it's beneficial they can adopt them of their own will and eventually maybe apply for membership. What is the the Federation doing wrong here? The only way to prevent this would be for the Federation to cease any contact with the outside world.

I think the greater point in Eddington's speech was 'nobody leaves the Federation, nobody leaves paradise', not 'everybody should want to be in the Federation' (though they are of course connected). The Federation isn't culturally imperialistic but is guilty of being too sure of it's qualities and having a too idealized image of itself.

 

[T'Girl]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

Well, no, because "The Cloud Minders" makes it very clear that the Federation hadn't realized Ardana had a caste system before the Enterprise crew got there [snip] and that the Federation is going to force them to abolish that caste system.

Actual the best Kirk did do was to mildly suggest third-party mediation, which the planet's government rejects. There isn't the slightest hint that the Federation is going to compel any kind of change.

The planet Ardana was a well visited world, Kirk himself had been there before and knew that Stratos chief occupation was art, Spock knew that there was a working class and the working class were referred to as Troglyte.

The only thing the two of them didn't know about was the disrupters and their dispute with the government. It was an internal problem, as the head of government reminds Kirk, Federation orders can not defy local governments.

Second - if the federation tries to influence other worlds to adopt its values by helping them and being nice to them, I say 'Good for the federation'.

Technically that referred to as culture imperialism.

You find such cultural influence morally lacking? I disagree - indeed, it is a betrayal of your morals to see people suffering due to their social order and NOT help alleviate the problem.

That would show that the Federation does not embrace diversity. If the Federation believes that their particular intellectual constructs are the only valid ones possible, this would show a alarming level of arrogance.

Because the Federation is [snip] frustrating their desire to expand their power and territory

Thus, the klingons/romulans/cardassians/etc were forced to expand outwards ...

I see.

And the klingons control thousands of star systems.

There's no indication that they do. If the Klingon empire was just a couple of dozen star systems, that would easily make them a counterpart to the TOS era Federation.

Define 'poor':
Is it 'poor in resources', minerals and the like? Ridiculous. A simple asteroid belt contains vast amounts of such riches.

Sure we have two, but the Klingon star systems might easily have none.

"Poor" usually is referring to a lack economic and financial "wealth," if the Klingons exist within a steady or closed economic system they might not be able to find equilibrium. They can't achieve a balanced market within the limited number of planets available to them, perhaps owing to the particular economic model they're employing. Theoretically a capitalistic model would work regardless of the size of the market. However if the Klingons advanced down the blind alley of one of the non-capitalistic models they wouldn't necessarily be able to make it work. The episode The House of Quark clearly shows that they don't understand money.

The 'poor in resources' thing just doesn't work when applied to interstellar civilizations: space is full of such resources.

Resources are only valuable if you can do something with them, that goes back to Kor's "strangle our trade."

Or is it poor as in 'the society is poor'? .

Given that it was the Klingon Mara who said that the Klingon system was poor, it doubtful that's what she meant.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

I think the greater point in Eddington's speech was 'nobody leaves the Federation, nobody leaves paradise'

And there's no evidence of that, either. He was such a narcissist that he thought the Federation was attacking the Maquis for leaving the Federation. Which was not true, of course; the Federation was doing it because the Maquis' terrorist and criminal activities were endangering the peace with the Cardassians and could have led to war. Indeed, in a very real sense, they DID lead to war, because the Maquis' actions were a direct predecessor to the Cardassians' joining the Dominion...

There is absolutely zero proof, zero evidence, zero citations that worlds are prohibited from leaving the Federation. It makes no logical sense, at the very least. Any organization that has strict requirements for membership must logically have ways by which a rogue world can be expelled (or can voluntarily request to leave).

 

[T'Girl]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

^^^ One of the novel/fanfic's (forget which) said that the Federation member Cait, fairly regularly leaves and re-enters Federation membership, as a way of indicating displease with various council decisions.

The crew were making a bit of a joke about it.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

Ah, the Caitians. Must have been just catting around.

 

[Anwar]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

About the Klingons in TOS, the female Mara did say that their "systems were poor" or something like that. Maybe they just don't have enough of those made-up elements/resources that Trek species need in those systems? If stuff like Dilithium really is that rare it wouldn't matter if they had thousands of planets, they'd still be poor resource-wise.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

T'Girl

"Technically that referred to as culture imperialism."

Cultural imperialism implies coercion, which is completely absent in the Federation's policy.

Cultural exchange is what's happening - and that's inevitable every time two cultures meet.
The only way to prevent that is for the two culturen NOT to meet - and it's non-sense. Historically, cultural exchange proved to be benefic to all interacting civilizations.


"That would show that the Federation does not embrace diversity. If the Federation believes that their particular intellectual constructs are the only valid ones possible, this would show a alarming level of arrogance."

T'Girl, let's say you encounnter a people where rape or murder is moral and even desirable. Let's say you see a murderer killing in cold blood, on the street, someone who screams for help.
Do you 'interfere' or you choose to watch, doing nothing, betraying your morals?
Let's say you watch someone from that culture rape one of your own people? Do you sit by, just watching, in the name of moral relativity?
What if you are the victim? You just stay still, yes? I mean, from the criminal's perspective, what he's doing is as moral as it gets.

The Federation, as shown on-screen, embraces diversity to a large extent, more than anyonne else.
But there comes a point when embracing 'diversity', when accepting alien values, is a betrayal of your own morals - when the two moral systems are incompatible.


"There's no indication that they do. If the Klingon empire was just a couple of dozen star systems"
"Resources are only valuable if you can do something with them"

A few dozen star systems contain all the resoures you'll ever need. T'Girl, an interstellar civilization will be NEVER lacking in resources.
And the klingons DO have - any interstellar civilization has - the technological know-how to transform these resources into societal wealth.

If the klingons get a kick out of killing each other and their society is poor as a result, they have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[neozeks]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

And there's no evidence of that, either. He was such a narcissist that he thought the Federation was attacking the Maquis for leaving the Federation. Which was not true, of course; the Federation was doing it because the Maquis' terrorist and criminal activities were endangering the peace with the Cardassians and could have led to war. Indeed, in a very real sense, they DID lead to war, because the Maquis' actions were a direct predecessor to the Cardassians' joining the Dominion...

There is absolutely zero proof, zero evidence, zero citations that worlds are prohibited from leaving the Federation. It makes no logical sense, at the very least. Any organization that has strict requirements for membership must logically have ways by which a rogue world can be expelled (or can voluntarily request to leave).

I don't think he meant that leaving was prohibited. Just that the Federation was so sure it was a perfect 'paradise' that it couldn't possibly understand why anyone would want to leave it. It wasn't compatible with it's view of itself, it was an offence to it's reputation. But while I do think he may have partially had a point here, I agree it was secondary to the motive of preserving the peace.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

Just that the Federation was so sure it was a perfect 'paradise' that it couldn't possibly understand why anyone would want to leave it. It wasn't compatible with it's view of itself, it was an offence to it's reputation.

I suppose that's possible. Then again, the Maquis could also have wanted to leave out of sheer jealousy. The Federation comes up with a society that's so much better than anything they could manage - maybe they just left out of spite.

If the Maquis assumed that the Federation can't understand why a world would leave, then it stands to reason that the Maquis couldn't understand why a world WOULDN'T leave.

 

[neozeks]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

I suppose that's possible. Then again, the Maquis could also have wanted to leave out of sheer jealousy. The Federation comes up with a society that's so much better than anything they could manage - maybe they just left out of spite.

If the Maquis assumed that the Federation can't understand why a world would leave, then it stands to reason that the Maquis couldn't understand why a world WOULDN'T leave.

Oh, I'm not defending the Maquis. I think they were just as misguided (or even more) in some of their views as the Federation. That's why I like DS9, it's not black-and-white.

Though I don't think it was jealousy. They were a part of that society themselves after all. But being colonists they probably naturally felt more independent and less connected to the mainstream of Federation society and that, combined with the (right or wrong, doesn't matter) feeling of being betrayed, made it easier for them to decide their interests would better be served outside of the Federation.

 

[Nightdiamond]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

If I had to choose between the Federation and the Romulans, Cardassians, Or Klingons, I would definetly choose to be a Federation citizen.

No hard choice there- the Romulans are oppressive and paranoid (no free speech) you can get arrested easily there, just for saying the wrong thing out loud.

The Cardassians- militaristic, and partly ruled by their intelligence agency and very resource poor.

The Kingons are more free, but still put limits on what some can achieve, gender based discrimination, had a corrupt government that no one challenged and have a class based culture somewhat.

The Maquis- They had Federation-like values, but also were also borderline delusional and dangerous- Chakotay once punched a Maqui crew member in the face and said, 'that's how we do things in the Maquis too, isn't it?'


The Federation? Replicators all around, all basic needs are provided. No poverty.

You work mainly for personal satisfaction and to better society.

That's what MOST would people want today, I would think.

I found an article on another website, where the author made the case that the Federation is communist, as in why would anyone want to live in such a horrible place!


I think it's a little overkill- I suppose to still be competing over food and resources, and arguing over political solutions in the 24th century is much more preferable based on that idea.

 

[T'Girl]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

"Technically that referred to as culture imperialism."

Cultural imperialism implies coercion, which is completely absent in the Federation's policy.

Culture Imperialism: To favor one culture over others through a subtle form of supremacy over prevailing cultural practices, often through use of media images, gentle manipulation and societal pressure.

T'Girl, let's say you encounnter a people where rape or murder is moral and even desirable.

Let's say ProtoAvatar you are on a planet where humanoid males battle to the death (one commits murder in your eyes), for the ownership of a native "bride", while one of them is under the influence of an involuntary psychological condition. You know that if the psychological male succeeds in murdering his victim, there will be a frenzied rape of the native "bride" and that subsequently she will actual become the murder/rapists property.

Do you 'interfere' or you choose to watch, doing nothing

What do you do? Do you apply you own ethics? You physically take the mentally ill male to a near-by psychedelic hospital to be treated for his involuntary psychological condition? Would you ProtoAvatar personal break up the fight? Perhaps you could rescue the woman, to prevent her from becoming the lifelong property of the murder/rapist (how "James Bond" of you).

someone from that culture rape one of your own people?

Here's an easier one, takes place right here on Earth, modern day. There's a beautiful 15 year old girl, mid way through high school and 3 years from the age of consent. She is about to be "married" to a 35 year old man. You know ProtoAvatar that on the "wedding night" he going to take her virginity. In your eyes that makes her a rape victim and him a pedophile. Again what do you do? Do you shoot the man dead? Rescue the young girl? Or do you embrace diversity and gentlemanly toss dry rice at the happy couple?

Trick question, the 15year old is my friend Maria, married a 35 year old man 15 years ago with the full consent of her family, This was in Brazil where most of my family lives. They have 3 children, and at 50 Joseph gets a lot of complements on his young wife.

It's called diversity, diversity doesn't mean everyone agrees with you. You would have been wrong to rescue the bride in Brazil and wrong to rescue the bride on Vulcan. Obviously the Federation government believes in it's own ideals (or reached them through compromise) or it wouldn't have them in the first place. But that doesn't make them the preferential ideals of all cultures in the galaxy.

Likely even though the Federation government has one system of ideals and societal beliefs , it is also likely that 150 members and thousand of colonies practice completely different ideals and societal beliefs from the Federation government and each other. Different laws, beliefs, sexuality, and governments. What use ProtoAvatar does a sentient Insect race with a hereditary Queen have with "liberal democracy?" And the Federation has no more business insisting on a single system of cultural and societal beliefs for all it new members, than it does a single system of cultural and societal beliefs for all it old members. Both are wrong.

 

[neozeks]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

Culture Imperialism: To favor one culture over others through a subtle form of supremacy over prevailing cultural practices, often through use of media images, gentle manipulation and societal pressure.

But do we ever see the Federation doing any of those things?

Likely even though the Federation government has one system of ideals and societal beliefs , it is also likely that 150 members and thousand of colonies practice completely different ideals and societal beliefs from the Federation government and each other. Different laws, beliefs, sexuality, and governments.

Well, there's the thing. All those different beliefs and ideals are just individual cultural expressions of a broader, more universal set of beliefs and it is that second set that makes up Federation ideals. Federation ideals aren't human ideals. They're a broader set of rational principles from which individual species, including humans, derive their own beliefs, suited to their specific circumstances. Like the sentient insect race example - are they all individually sentient? Are they all biologically equal, including the Queen? If yes, liberal democracy is perfectly applicable. Are they a collective mind (voluntary/by birth, not coerced)? Do individuals retain some individuality in the collective or are they just 'parts' of a larger single organism? In these later cases, no, liberal democracy as we know it doesn't apply, but the basic ideas behind it (freedom, selfdetermination, equality) still have to apply. I'm sure figuring out if that's the case in exotic examples like the above gives Federation philosophers, ethicist and jurists a head-ache, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.

As for your wedding example, frankly, that's wrong. The age of consent exists for a reason. Humans psychologically aren't developed enough before a certain age to make those kinds of decisions. In the case of some other species, that may not be the case and an age of consent won't exist or will be different. But it's the underlying principle that's important. I'll have to think a bit more about the Vulcan example.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

T'Girl

If you understand cultural imperialism as not implying coercion of any kind (an unorthodox understanding of the term), than cultural imperialism is equivalent to cultural exchange, unavoidable when two cultures meet, benefic to both.

As for the rest - T'Girl, you have yet to answer my questions.
Mostly, you repeated the rhetoric from your last post (the objections you raised were answered to by neozeks), not addressing any of the problems I indicated existed with them.
This time, actually address my questions, T'Girl:

"T'Girl, let's say you encounnter a people where rape or murder is moral and even desirable. Let's say you see a murderer killing in cold blood, on the street, someone who screams for help.
Do you 'interfere' or you choose to watch, doing nothing, betraying your morals?
Let's say you watch someone from that culture rape one of your own people? Do you sit by, just watching, in the name of moral relativity?
What if you are the victim? You just stay still, yes? I mean, from the criminal's perspective, what he's doing is as moral as it gets.

The Federation, as shown on-screen, embraces diversity to a large extent, more than anyonne else.
But there comes a point when embracing 'diversity', when accepting alien values, is a betrayal of your own morals - when the two moral systems are incompatible."

 

[Sci]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

T'Girl

If you understand cultural imperialism as not implying coercion of any kind (an unorthodox understanding of the term), than cultural imperialism is equivalent to cultural exchange, unavoidable when two cultures meet, benefic to both.

No -- it's unavoidable if one culture makes it its mission to spread its culture to other cultures. Exchanges can occur without such an agenda.

Now, let's be frank here: Cultural imperialism can be a bad thing, but sometimes it's also a moral good or morally neutral. I'm sorry, but if the United States ever manages to peacefully persuade every culture on this planet that female genital mutilation is wrong? Yeah, that's cultural imperialism, but I'm okay with it.

What I would suggest is this: The Federation is not morally pure, and it sometimes behaves in very arrogant, self-interested ways, and it sometimes practices cultural imperialism. Some of the grievances other states have against the Federation are probably valid.

That does not mean that the Federation is therefore a "bad" state, or that it's immoral, or that it isn't even just a basically decent place. Nor does it mean that the hatred and violent responses to the Federation's less admirable behaviors are justified. It just means that the Federation's not perfect, and we shouldn't have illusions about hostile states that basically boil down to, "They hate us because of our freedom."

 

[T'Girl]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

you repeated the rhetoric from your last post

Gee, you don't think I'm repeating my position because it's, you know, my position?

 

[tau136]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

Have you ever tried convincing a bully, thug or drunk that no you really don't feel like having a fight ?

 

[neozeks]

Re: Why are so many of the UFP's powerful neighbors hostile towards th

Now, let's be frank here: Cultural imperialism can be a bad thing, but sometimes it's also a moral good or morally neutral. I'm sorry, but if the United States ever manages to peacefully persuade every culture on this planet that female genital mutilation is wrong? Yeah, that's cultural imperialism, but I'm okay with it.

Personally, I'd be very hesitant to call something like that cultural imperialism, it has too many negative connotations for something that is, as you say, potentially morally good. But hey, no definition is perfect.

What I would suggest is this: The Federation is not morally pure, and it sometimes behaves in very arrogant, self-interested ways, and it sometimes practices cultural imperialism. Some of the grievances other states have against the Federation are probably valid.

That does not mean that the Federation is therefore a "bad" state, or that it's immoral, or that it isn't even just a basically decent place. Nor does it mean that the hatred and violent responses to the Federation's less admirable behaviors are justified. It just means that the Federation's not perfect, and we shouldn't have illusions about hostile states that basically boil down to, "They hate us because of our freedom."

Agreed. But we also shouldn't deny that in the end, even though it's extremely oversimplyfied, in a number of cases there is some truth to that statement.

Oh, and about the pon farr (yeah, it's OT, but it's interesting)... T'Girl, you misrepresented it a bit. There's no rape involved, the fight itself breaks the hold of pon farr on the winner - the fight is a substitute when the other partner doesn't want to mate. Yeah, it involves taking life (though not neccessarily, in that VOY episode it didn't - maybe that's because B'Ellana wasn't Vulcan). But the side(s) in pon farr will die anyway if it doesn't fight and the side not in pon farr, if it exists, has a choice of participating (I think). Therefore, it consents to the possibility of losing it life. And one mate (remember, females undergo pon farr as well) isn't and doesn't become property of the other. One mate can't force the other to have sex. It's just their telepathic link that's at stake. At least that's how I think it works, haven't seen Amok Time in a long time. I'd be very uneasy if it actually involved becoming property.

It may not be perfectly moral if humans were involved, but then, we're not telepathically bonded with our mates at a young age and do not undergo a potentially lethal experience every seven years.